Allahabad High Court
Mohd. Nafees Khan vs State Of U.P. Thru. The Prin. Secy. Home ... on 28 July, 2022
Author: Ramesh Sinha
Bench: Ramesh Sinha, Saroj Yadav
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH ?Court No. - 1 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 14159 of 2019 Petitioner :- Mohd. Nafees Khan Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. The Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. And Ors. Counsel for Petitioner :- Firoz Ahmad Khan,R.A. Khan Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha,J.
Hon'ble Mrs. Saroj Yadav,J.
(Crl. Misc. Application No.IA/4/2022) This application has been filed on behalf of the petitioner to recall order dated 7.5.2022 whereby the petition was dismissed as infructuous.
Heard Shri R.A. Khan, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Vishwas Shukla, learned A.G.A.
Grounds shown in the affidavit filed in support of the application for recall are sufficient.
Accordingly, application for recall is allowed. Order dated 7.5.2022 is hereby recalled and petition is restored to its original number.
.
(Mrs. Saroj Yadav,J) (Ramesh Sinha,J) Order Date :- 28.7.2022 Shukla .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Court No. - 1Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 14159 of 2019 Petitioner :- Mohd. Nafees Khan Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. The Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. And Ors.
Counsel for Petitioner :- Firoz Ahmad Khan,R.A. Khan Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha,J.
Hon'ble Mrs. Saroj Yadav,J.
1. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner praying for the following reliefs:-
"(i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned History Sheet No.84-A/2009 dated 30.9.2009 opened against the petitioner as well as impugned order dated 8.10.2014 passed by opposite party no.2 pertaining to Police Station Rudauli, District Faizabad/Ayodhya contained as Annexure No.2 and 3.
ii). Issued a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the opposite parties to close the impugned History sheet no.84-A/2009 dated 30.9.2009 opened against the petitioner as well as impugned order dated 8.10.2014 passed by opposite party no.2 pertaining to Police Station Rudauli, District Faizabad/Ayodhya and not to act on the basis of the impugned History sheet against the petitioner."
2. Heard Shri R.A.Khan, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Vishwas Shukla, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State respondent.
3. It has been argued by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the opposite party no.2 has opened the history sheet of the petitioner on 30.9.2009 bearing History Sheet No.84-A/2009 for some extraneous considerations with ulterior motive. On 8.10.2014, Senior Superintendent of Police, Faizabad passed the impugned order by holding that the history sheet no.84-A/2009 would continue. A Class-A History sheet could not be opened against the petitioner under the provisions of the Uttar Pradesh Police Regulations (in short 'Regulations'). As per paragraph 231 of the U.P.Police Regulations, a Class-A History sheet shall continue for two consecutive years and thereafter his surveillance will be discontinued unless required for some special reasons recorded in writing. The petitioner is a law abiding citizen and at present posted as "prerak' in Prathmik Vidyyalaya, Haleem Nagar. The petitioner had earlier published various news items against the police personnel and other administrative authorities at District Faizabad. Therefore, the history sheet was opened maliciously. He further submitted that as per the Regulations, a Class-A history sheet is meant for dacoits, burglars, cattle-thieves, railway-goods wagon thieves, and abettors thereof. The cases which have been shown against the petitioner, do not fall in the categories described for opening of Class-A history sheets.
4. It was also argued that previously the petitioners challenged the history sheet in question by filing Writ Petition No.5920(M/B) of 2020 : Mohd.Nafees Khan Vs. State of U.P. and others wherein the Hon'ble Court passed the order directing the Senior Superintendent of Police, Faizabad/ Ayodhya to decide the representation filed by the petitioner to close the history sheet. Representation filed by the petitioner was dismissed by the Senior Superintendent of Police, Faizabad/ Ayodhya,arbitrarily. It was also submitted that the impugned order violates the fundamental rights of the petitioner guaranteed under Article 19(1) (b) as well as Article 21 of the Constitution of India. Hence, the petitioner prays for quashing the impugned order dated 8.10.2014 as well as the history sheet no.84-A/2009.
5. Counter affidavit was filed on behalf of the respondents wherein it has been stated that the petitioner has a criminal history of nine cases. In seven cases, chargesheets have been filed which are pending in the courts concerned. The investigation of two cases i.e. Crime No.200/2019 under 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Rudauli, District Ayodhya and Case Crime No.201/2009, under Section 504, 506 and 507 I.P.C., Police Station Rudauli, District Ayodhya is still pending. There is no illegality in opening the history sheet against the petitioner. The criminal history of the petitioner has been shown in Annexure No.A-1 filed alongwith counter affidavit, which are as under :-
"1. Case Crime No.157/2008, under Sections 323, 341, 504, 506, 354 I.P.C., Police Station Rudauli, District Ayodhya.
2. Case Crime No.418/2008, under Section 3/4 of the U.P.Goondas (Control) Act, Police Station Rudauli, District Ayodhya.
3. Case Crime No.145/2011, under Sections 323, 504 I.P.C., Police Station Rudauli, District Ayodhya.
4. Case Crime No.727/2008, under Sections 323, 341, 504, 506, 354 I.P.C., Police Station Rudauli, District Ayodhya.
5. Case Crime No.169/2017, under Sections 323, 504 I.P.C., Police Station Rudauli, District Ayodhya.
6. Case Crime No.223/2013, under Sections 323, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Rudauli, District Ayodhya.
7. Case Crime No.527/2017, under Sections 376, 452, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Rudauli, District Ayodhya.
8. Case Crime No.200/2019, under Sections 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Rudauli, District Ayodhya.
9. Case Crime No.201/2019, under Sections 504 507 I.P.C., Police Station Rudauli, District Ayodhya."
6. Learned A.G.A has further submitted in the counter affidavit that considering the criminal history of the petitioner the history sheet opened and the impugned order passed are in accordance with law and the Regulations.
7. In paragraph 7 of the rejoinder affidavit, the petitioner has explained the criminal history given in Annexure No.A-1 to the counter affidavit.
8. Considered the submissions made by both the sides.
9. Paragraph 228 of the Regulations, relates to opening of history-sheet which reads as follows:-
"Part V consists of history sheets. These are the personal records of criminals under surveillance. history-sheets should be opened only for persons who are or likely to become habitual criminal or abettors of such criminals. There will be two classes of history-sheets :
(1) Class A history-sheets for dacoits, burglars, cattle-thieves, railway-goods wagon thieves, and abettors thereof.
(2) Class B history-sheets for confirmed and professional criminals who commit crimes other than dacoity, burglary, cattle-theft, and theft from railway goods wagons, e.g., professional cheats and other experts for whom criminal personal files are maintained by the Criminal Investigation Department, poisoners, cattle poisoners, railway passenger thieves, bicycle thieves, expert pick-pockets, forgers, coiners, cocaine and opium smugglers, hired ruffians and goondas, telegraph wire-cutters, habitual illicit distillers and abettors thereof.
History-sheets of both classes will be maintained in similar form, but those for class B will be distinguished by a red bar marked at the top of the first page. No history-sheet of class B may be converted into a history-sheet of class A, though should be the subject of a history-sheet of class B be found to be also addicted to dacoity, burglary, cattle-theft or theft from railway goods wagons. A class, as well as B class, surveillance may under paragraph 238 be applied to him. In the event of a class A history-sheet man becoming addicted to miscellaneous crime his history-sheet may be converted into a class B history-sheet with the sanction of the Superintendent."
10. Perusal of the above para of Regulations shows that Class -A history sheet is meant for dacoits, burglars, cattle-thieves, railway-goods wagon thieves, and abettors thereof. The criminal history described in Annexure A-1 to the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the opposite parties does not describe any of the cases which falls under such category.
11. Furthermore, the petitioner has mentioned in his rejoinder affidavit that the case Crime No.157/08, under Sections, 323, 504, 506 and 354 I.P.C. described at serial no.i is not pending against him as on filing questionnaire about the same, the court answered that no such case is pending against him, Copy of the same has been annexed as Annexure No.RA-1.
So far as Case Crime No.418/2008 described at serial no.ii is concerned, the same has been withdrawn by the Additional City Magistrate, Faizabad vide order dated 26.12.2008. Copy of the order has been annexed to the rejoinder affidavit as Annexure No.RA-2 So far as N.C.R.No.145/2011 described at serial no.iii is concerned, in the instant case, the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Faizabad has called for the report about the current status of the N.C.R. upon which the officer concerned stated therein that the said N.C.R. was being investigated by the Sub Inspector Sumeshwar Singh and he did not return the case diary to the police station. Copy of the relevant document has been annexed as Annexure No.RA-3.
Case Crime No.727/2011 (wrongly mentioned as 727/2018 ) described at serial no.iv was instituted upon the notice under the Goondas Act which was withdrawn by the Additional City Magistrate, Administration Faizabad vide order dated 17.2.2014. Copy of the order dated 17.2.2014 has been annexed as Annexure No.RA-4.
So far as N.C.R. No.169/2017, under Sections 323, 504 I.P.C. described at serial no.v is concerned, the petitioner has been acquitted by the learned C.J.M., Faizabad vide order dated 26.3.2021. Copy of the order dated 26.3.2021 has been annexed as Annexure No.RA-5.
In N.C.R. No.232 of 2013( wrongly mentioned as Case Crime No.223/2013) described at serial no.vi, the petitioner has been acquitted by the learned C.J.M., Faizabad vide order dated 2.8.2017. Copy of the order dated 2.8.2017 has been annexed as Annexure No.RA-6.
In Case Crime No.597 of 2017 ( wrongly mentioned as Case Crime No.527/2017) described at serial no.vii, final report no.12/2018 was submitted by the investigating officer in the court on 1.10.2018. Copy of the chargesheet dated 18.12.2018 has been annexed as Annexure No.RA-7.
In Case Crime No.200/2019, under Sections 504, 506 I.P.C. described at serial no.viii, the petitioner has been acquitted by the learned C.J.M., Faizabad vide order dated 27.1.2021. Copy of the order dated 27.1.2021 has been annexed as Annexure No.RA-8.
In Case Crime No.201/2019, under Sections 504 507 I.P.C. described at serial no.ix, the police has filed F.I.R. against the petitioner just after filing the writ petition before the High Court for the purpose to harass the petitioner.
12. Learned A.G.A. did not dispute the facts stated in the rejoinder affidavit about the status of the criminal history of the petitioner.
13. The cases detailed in the list and the status described by the petitioner clearly show that there is no material against the petitioner to open Class -A history and to continue with that. To continue with the history sheet of the petitioner is in clear violation of Regulations, and it violates the fundamental rights of the petitioner guaranteed under Article 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India.
14. In the light of the above facts and discussions, we are of considered opinion that there is no need to keep the petitioner under surveillance by maintaining his history-sheet and, as such, the History sheet No.84-A of 2009 dated 30.9.2009 and the impugned order dated 8.10.2014 deserve to be quashed.
15. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed. History sheet No.84-A of 2009 dated 30.9.2009 and the impugned order dated 8.10.2014 contained in Annexure No.2 and 3 are hereby quashed.
.
(Mrs. Saroj Yadav,J) (Ramesh Sinha,J) Order dated : 28.7.2022.
Shukla.